BO: We don’t have time for propaganda…Evidence indicates that the plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile that was launched from an area that is controlled by Russian-backed separatists inside of Ukraine.

RT:However, it is unclear who fired the missile or where it was fired from. US intelligence officials believe the attack from an area controlled by the pro-Russian separatists, according to the president…

A Ukrainian Buk anti-aircraft missile battery was operational in the region, the Russian Defense Ministry said, contradicting Kiev’s statements. The battery was deployed at a site from which it could have fired a missile at the airliner, the ministry said in a statement. It said radiation from the battery’s radar was detected by the Russian military.

Wouldn’t be the first time the Ukranian military took down a civilian airliner:

BO: We also know that this is not the first time a plane has been shot down in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine finally admitted yesterday that its military shot down a Russian airliner that crashed into the Black Sea last week, killing all 78 passengers and crew.Evhen Marchuk, the chairman of Ukraine’s security council, conceded that the plane had probably been brought down by “an accidental hit from an S-200 rocket fired during exercises”.

And who is supporting whom? Pot calling the kettle black???

BO: Moreover, we know that these separatists have received a steady flow of support from Russia.

“The United States is working to bolster Ukraine’s ability to secure its borders and preserve its territorial integrity…” the White House said in a statement announcing the aid…

Earlier U.S. military equipment was limited to 300,000 Meals Ready-to-Eat and medical supplies, helmets, sleeping mats, and water purification gear.Additionally, the administration is using funds under the Cooperative Threat Reduction fund to provide goods to the Ukrainian State Border Guard Services, including clothing, shelters, small power generators and hand fuel pumps, engineering equipment, communications equipment, vehicles, and non-lethal individual tactical gear.

Who’s the propagandist, and who’s the diplomat?

BO: I spoke to President Putin yesterday in the wake of additional sanctions that we had imposed. He said he wasn’t happy with them, and I told him that we have been very clear from the outset that we want Russia to take the path that would result in peace in Ukraine, but so far, at least, Russia has failed to take that path. Instead, it has continued to violate Ukrainian sovereignty and to support violent separatists.It has also failed to use its influence to press the separatists to abide by a cease-fire. That’s why, together with our allies, we’ve imposed growing costs on Russia.

So now’s, I think, a somber and appropriate time for all of us to step back and take a hard look at what has happened. Violence and conflict inevitably lead to unforeseen consequences. Russia, these separatists, and Ukraine all have the capacity to put an end to the fighting.

Meanwhile, the United States is going to continue to lead efforts within the world community to de-escalate the situation, to stand up for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and to support the people of Ukraine as they courageously work to strengthen their democracy and make their own decisions about how they should move forward.

Putin:We will need to see what those sanctions entail; we will need to look into it calmly, without any commotion. In general, I would like to say that unfortunately, those who plan foreign policy actions in the United States (this is not a recent observation but one pertaining to the last 10-15 years) are conducting an aggressive foreign policy and, in my view, a rather unprofessional one, because whatever they do, there are problems everywhere…

It would be good if everyone understood that we must rely on the fundamental principles of international law and domestic law, and treat statehood and constitutionality with great care, particularly in nations that are just getting on their feet, where the political system is still fairly young and immature, and where the economy is still developing.

We need to treat state institutions with great care. There are grave consequences when they are regarded with disdain: disintegration and internal conflicts, as we are currently observing in Ukraine.

The people who are pushing other countries toward such developments should never forget that the blood of the soldiers in the regular army, the blood of the fighters in the resistance, and the civilians, first and foremost, is on their hands, as are the tears of the mothers, widows and orphans – they are on their conscience, and they do not have any moral right to shrug off this responsibility onto anyone else’s shoulders.

Here is what should be done jointly: calling on all sides in the conflict in Ukraine to immediately cease hostilities and start talks. But unfortunately, we are not seeing this on the part of our partners, first and foremost our American partners who, on the contrary, it seems to me, are pushing Ukraine’s current authorities toward continuing a fratricidal war and continuing retributive operations. This policy holds no promise.

As for various sanctions, I have already said that they generally have a boomerang effect and, without a doubt, in this case, are driving the Russian-US relations into a stalemate and seriously damaging them.

I am certain that this is harmful to the US Administration and American people’s long-term strategic national interests.It is very unfortunate that our partners are following this path, but the door to the negotiation process for overcoming and getting past this situation remains open.

I hope that reason and the desire to settle all problems via peaceful, diplomatic means will prevail.

If nothing else, the propaganda value of this tragedy to Obama’s foreign policy (not to mention the use already of this tragedy as misinformation and propaganda) is enough motive to make his words suspect.

And diplomacy? How can you maintain an aura of diplomacy in an era of NSA and CIA orchestrated global state subversion without propaganda? You can’t.

————————[Addendum: I’m going to add a section on Joe Biden, as I know it will really piss some people off.]

“This is a grave situation. Nearly 300 souls have been lost,” he said.

Putting aside the stupid prose (this is a “grave situation”) about a flight disaster where the remains of hundreds will have to be buried, did Biden really want to talk about the theological implications of one’s loss of soul? Joe Biden is a self-avowed “practicing Catholic,” as he attested to during the 2012 VP debates.

Assurance of Salvation? …Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.

Grace: What It Is and What It Does.…Imagine yourself transported instantaneously to the bottom of the ocean. What’s the very first thing you’ll do? That’s right: die. You’d die because you aren’t equipped to live underwater. You don’t have the right breathing apparatus.

If you want to live in the deep blue sea, you need equipment you aren’t provided with naturally; you need something that will elevate you above your nature, something super- (that is, “above”) natural, such as oxygen tanks.

It’s much the same with your soul. In its natural state, it isn’t fit for heaven. It doesn’t have the right equipment, and if you die with your soul in its natural state, heaven won’t be for you. What you need to live there is supernatural life, not just natural life.

That supernatural life is called sanctifying grace. The reason you need sanctifying grace to be able to live in heaven is because you will be in perfect and absolute union with God, the source of all life (cf. Gal. 2:19, 1 Pet. 3:18).

Yep, that Joe… a walking gaffe-a-thon. Not to mention being the point man behind the U.S.’s covert ops in Ukraine.

look at how the Daily Beast article you linked to in my post starts out:

President Putin has been recklessly escalating the crisis in eastern Ukraine since he was embarrassed and outmaneuvered by the Ukrainian president three weeks ago. Allowing a passenger jet to be shot down is the act of an increasingly desperate man.

talk about spin and wild speculation, personalizing this crisis as the desperation of one man, Putin. what a joke.

let’s remember that the coup-government in Kiev has been the catalyst for reckless escalation by using Neo-Nazis to terrorize people (example, Odessa) in an attempt to draw in Russia to trigger a direct confrontation.

let’s also remember this is all about energy resources, and it’s backfiring in a big way for the US. Obama could be more accurately depicted as the desperate one here, seeing his Asia pivot evaporate as Russia gets more cozy with China and Europe trembles at the economic impact they would suffer if the full scope of sanctions against Russia were implemented.

what is Ukraine going to do when winter comes? are they going to freeze because they can’t pay their energy bills? is Europe going to save them? will US taxpayers save them? we can’t even save people in Detroit from being deprived of water.

Thanks, JC. Good post, as usual. It will be interesting to see who is pushing for retaliatory action prior to a full investigation. What is needed now is an impartial international investigative body with subpoena powers. If instead we get the US Cowboy, it’s a safe bet the US is behind the shoot-down.

The Washington Free Beacon, sited approvingly in this post by JC, regularly features content from Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and John Bolton. They’re right-wing nuts but they’re firmly anti-Obama. So that makes them good enough for JC, I guess.

My favorite article in the Beacon is the one about Obama being a bird murderer because he is promoting windmill farms. Visit Snopes to see what bullshit this is.

Sometimes it’s a good idea, when you’re engaging in polemics, to look around and see who’s on your side.

Is there wrong information in the Beacon article? I read widely, and the same information as to weaponry we supplied to Ukraine is available in dozens of articles, left to right. I don’t like to get caught up in the echo chamber of just getting to read “approved” sources.

Have a problem with the Beacon or WND, or any other of the “forbidden” sources? Learn to read between the lines. Want to stay with conventional wisdom? Read the MSM, and the slew of “liberal” media sources that work to subvert dissent by reinforcing U.S. propaganda.

Of more significance than the publicly available information on what kinds of military and public assistance we are giving Ukraine is the covert assistance we are giving them. I’ve been working on this story for a few months now. Believe me, it far exceeds what the Beacon — or the Post or Times or NPR — are reporting.